||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Construction & Materials
T Clarke Share Discussion Threads
Showing 2301 to 2322 of 2325 messages
|My modelling tentatively places a value of 66.3p per share on CTO. There is a lot of uncertainty in those projections, however, principally due to its high operational gearing but also due to the pension deficit.
A HOLD for me at present, but I will be looking for more certainty over improving margins before I consider averaging down here.|
|These Directors look to me to be of the old school type who act more like managers, and are rewarded(fairly well) via salaries and bonuses(which in recent years have been thin) and via options which also have not provided much recently. They are very long term players (not surprisingly with a company that has been around for well over 100 years) and want to pass on a business well placed to cope with the next few decades. These are admirable qualities but frustrating for even patient shareholders such as myself who would like to see Directors viewing Shareholders with a little more focus at the expense perhaps of Employees/Customers.
On balance their conservative approach to running this business, may well stand us in good stead when the next Recession/Depression arrives, assuming that is that I have failed as usual to spot its appearance.|
|And still no Director buying, would've thought more pertinent than ever now. Speaks volumes.|
|Yes what a disgrace the company invited UKSA for a visit without inviting long suffering shareholders. Surely the company has a case against their Auditors for not noticing the fraud?|
|Good in parts I guess. margin trends still opaque. They come across as though they are expecting a Brexit inspired air pocket to appear anytime.
I would be surprised if they get much back from the fraud recovery and certainly would not factor it in to share price expectations. Pity only just got to hear about the company visit arranged by UKSA.|
|I'm of the view the £2.8m is the total extent of the fraud I'm guessing the payments have all been routed to one supplier account and therefore the account history shows the total value defrauded.
I found the trading statement the usual T. Clarke cautious optimism, a summary of which is "things are going in the right direction and we'll keep managing expectations so we can continue to show a smooth trajectory"
Today's trades seem to indicate cautious optimism by investors too. It would be nice to think it is upwards from here|
|If the £2.8 million was no longer a reasonable estimate they would have said so.|
|You'd think CTO would have provided an update on the potential maximum amount associated with the fraud?? Perhaps they don't yet know what that is?|
|Trading statement on Thurs. V interested to hear any comments on margin trends, particularly as such comment was so noticeably muted in the August int report.|
|Possible scenario (?):
Fake invoice written by Matey 1 on legitimate Creditor Company notepaper.
Matey 2 produces it to the Finance Director at Debtor Company T.Clarke who agrees it.
Matey 2 re-directs the payment to bank account shared by the two mateys ?
Creditor Company doesn't miss the dosh, because it did not expect to receive anything;
Debtor Company doesn't miss the dosh because it settled an apparently legitimate invoice ?|
|I suspect that this issue is that this is invoice fraud as that's the only way the costs can be in the books.
So, company receives invoice from legitimate company with legitimate bank account (owned by the fraudster), but no work is done for the invoice provided.
But, it's hard to understand how such large amounts could have been taken out. The turnover of DG Robson was £8m 6 years ago. I don't know how much it would be now but taking out £500k a year from a company with that small a turnover should be noticed by the FD or one of his staff.
I think the FD may be under pressure here.|
|During those 7 years did the auditors rubber-stamp the accounting records 7 times, with not a single question ?|
|Sorry ask not bid!!!|
|CC2014They weren't all sells. Many were buys. Although top of the bid was 61p this afternoon you could buy for 59.3pRegardsBaz|
|"...someone is soaking up all the stock presumably because full year guidance has been re-iterated."
More likely some insider knows that the cash leaked away before it could reach the bottom line, hitting margins as well as profits. The corollary being that in future this extra "cost" will not exist with benefits all round. This is especially the case if directors do the decent thing and take a substantial hit to their overgenerous remuneration. Some hopes. Of course any optimism is tempered by the thought that gross incompetence can easily be repeated, as I see with some other of my investments :-(|
|Price now recovered. I find it interesting that we have a long stream of reported sells yet the price continues to rise. It would seem that someone is soaking up all the stock presumably because full year guidance has been re-iterated|
|Ask is back up to 60p and CTO appears to be being well taken.
Totals for the L2 bid/ask are 69k v 41k, so looking good there.|
|There may be other cans of worms lurking here if financial controls are lacking.......|
|Level 2 bid/ask totals - strong at 67k v 41k.
Best bid/ask even stronger at 2:1
|I'm now back in. A disproportionate mark down, relative to the statement yesterday.
|I wonder if Danny Robson's sudden resignation in March has anything to do with this.
On track to meet market expectations -- those are for around 8p EPS, which arguably makes the shares good value imo.|
|Why does this plc not have auditors ?|